When did the doctrine of..........

[IFB Mole]

the rapture start. I know, I know, I'll get the wisecracks that say "when the BIble eas written".

What I mean is the whole rapture, 7 year tribulation, the 144,000 Jewish missionaries going out, the second coming then a 1,000 year reign on earth but there will those born during the 1,000 that will reject Christ and Satan will be bound for a 1,000 then let loose, etc. etc.

When I read older commentaries on Daniel, Ezekiel, Revelation and other "end times" passages, no one of yester year ever mentions an end times scenerio like the one that today is so universally accepted??

Can some one help me out here or lead me to a good site that will clarify the matter?? I have been in an IFB-dispy church for 25 years and I confess this generally accepted end times beleif seems a stretch of the Bible at best because proponents seems to mix literal and allagory to "prove" their position.

 

[Andy T.]

Here is one article:

http://www.soundofgrace.com/v7/n7/history_dispen_kh.htm

 

[Ed Edwards]

When did the doctrine of the Rapture start:

Before the foundation of the world.
Here is my word study on 'foundation of the world'.

-------------------------------

The Greek word 'katabole' is translated foundation
and with 'cosmos' is translated 'foundation of the world'.

In the New Testament there are 10 occurances of
'foundation of the world'. There are two conditions:

pro (before)
apo (since or from)

Seven start with 'apo'
Three start with 'pro'

The differences are doctrinaly significant:
the three starting with 'pro' has to do with
God's love of Christ, God's selection of Christ,
and Christ's selection of we Christ-ones.



1Pe 1:20 (KJV1611):
Who verily was foreordeined before the foundation
of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you.

From Strong's:
G2602
καταβολή
katabolē
kat-ab-ol-ay'
From G2598; a deposition, that is,
founding; figuratively conception: - conceive, foundation.

Rev 17:8 (KJV1769):
The beast that thou sawest, was, and is not, and shall ascend out of the bottomlesse pit, and goe into perdition, and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, (whose names were not written in the booke of life from the foundation of the world) when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.

Foundation of the World in KJV1769:
Mt 13:35 (KJV1769):
That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying, I will open my mouth in parables; I will utter things which have been kept secret from the foundation of the world.

Matthew 25:34 (KJV1769):
Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:

Luke 11:50 (KJV1769):
That the blood of all the prophets, which was shed from the foundation of the world, may be required of this generation;

John 17:24 (KJV1769):
Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world.

Ephesians 1:4 (KJV1769): before = pro
According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:

Hebrews 4:3 (KJV1769): from = apo
For we which have believed do enter into rest, as he said, As I have sworn in my wrath, if they shall enter into my rest: although the works were finished from the foundation of the world.

Hebrews 9:26 (KJV1769): since = apo
For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

Revelation 13:8 (KJV1769):
And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

-------------------------------

Thus the Church (mostly Gentile) is not a 2,000 year
afterthought. The Church Age (mostly Gentile) was
planned by God BEFORE the foundation of the world.

This includes the collection of the Church Age,
born-again, redeemed, Elect Saints at the End of
the Chruch Age (AKA: the rapture/resurrection).

 

[Ed Edwards]

IFB Mole: //When did the dcotrine of..........
the rapture start.//

Define 'rapture'. Thank you.

 

[mes228]

Rapture

When you get much past 1st Thess. 4:16-17 and 1st Cor. 15:52-53 you are on very thin ground. I believe both of those scriptures. However, I believe much of the Rapture is extreme speculation. Wonderful, stirring, motivational, preaching to be sure - but speculation and opinion. Great word pictures are drawn daily and millions of books sold, but is it truth?? I think many will answer to God for opinions/speculation they have taught as unassailable truth. A charismatic Scottish teenager in a trance like state was the originator of this belief, I believe back in the mid 1800's. Before that no one had ever heard of it. Unfortunately she caught the eye and support of one of the translators of the Schofield Bible and it was included in the margins. Most all churches that believe this are in the regions where the Schofield Bible was distributed ie the "Bible belt" ie Baptist territory. And it has grown from there through Baptist churches. If it was in the margins, it must be truth. Today most Baptist don't care for the Schofield. Either it's a truth "revealed" pretty much only to the Baptist or it's poppycock. I don't readily know of anyone else that uses a "proof text" type of study to reach these fantastic scenarios. Take the above history of the Rapture with a grain of salt - I typed this from memory. I believe it's generally the truth of the matter. I don't know of any legitimate scholars that espouse this belief (there may be some - post them if you know of any non-Baptist). I do know of many Seminary hacks and Preachers that do espouse the Rapture. Much to the harm of their congregations I believe. I include this belief in the category of the 4 Baptist beliefs (not necessarily doctrines) that I believe are quite wrong. By the way I am Baptist.

 

[Ed Edwards]

Whomever: //A charismatic Scottish teenager in a trance
like state was the originator of this belief, I believe
back in the mid 1800's. //

This urban legend has a date of 1828.
And this urban legend also requires that
John Nelson Darby teach in 1830 the same
theories he was teaching first in
the USofA in the late 1870s. Come on folks,
If you spend 40 years developing your
understanding of the scripture, you don't teach
it the same way at the beginning as you do at
the end. Yes, I know by experience, not by
book learnin'.

Whomever: //Take the above history of the Rapture
with a grain of salt - I typed this from memory.
I believe it's generally the truth of the matter.//

Yes, it was so taken. ]
It is a common teaching cut & pasted
from web site to web site without any
examination for worthiness.

I like the way that John Darby got into his time
machine in 1830 and went back to 1605 so he could
get the KJV Translators to use this wording:

2 Thessalonians 2:3 (KJV1611 Edition):
Let no man deceiue you by any meanes,
for that day shall not come,
except there come a falling away first,
and that man of sinne bee reuealed,
the sonne of perdition,

You see the Greek word for 'falling away' is usually
translated in the KJV 'apostasy'. Yes 'Apostasy'
was a perfectly good 1610 word. But the KJV Translators
put in 'falling away'. Why? Because at least
the first six English translations before the KJV
had a form of 'departure' here. Yes, we are going]to\
depart this world at the first sound of the trumpet
and the first holler from Jesus COME UP HERE.

(To 'trick' everybody into believing his stuff,
John Darby called this rapture a 'secret rapture'.
Come on, this rapture is so noisy IT WAKES THE DEAD.
I don't think 'secret rapture' fits the bill.)

 

[Rex77]

From the Church Fathers
Quote from book 5 Chapter 29
Irenaeus in AD 117

And therefore, when in the
end the Church shall be suddenly caught up from this, it is said, “There
shall be tribulation such as has not been since the beginning, neither shall be.” For this is the last contest of the righteous, in which, when they
overcome they are crowned with incorruption.

2. And there is therefore in this beast, when he comes, a recapitulation
made of all sorts of iniquity and of every deceit, in order that all
apostate power, flowing into and being shut up in him, may be sent into the furnace of fire. Fittingly, therefore, shall his name possess the number six hundred and sixty-six, since he sums up in his own
person all the commixture of wickedness.


Its not a new doctrine

 

[Ed Edwards]

I get my Eschatology from the Bible.
The Bible (New Testament) is older than the Early Church
Fathers (ECF).

 

[Ed Edwards]

Pretrib pre-mill outline of time forward:

0. church age continues <== you are here!
1. rapture/resurrection event
2. Tribulation time
3. Second Advent of Jesus event
4. literal MK=millennial kingdom
5. new heaven & new earth

The time line according to Matthew 24
(Mount Olivet Discourse, also Matthew 25,
Mark 13, Luke 21):

0. church age continues <== you are here!
Matthew 24:4-15

1. rapture/resurrection event
Matthew 24:31-44

2. Tribulation time
Matthew 24:21-28

3. Second Advent of Jesus event
Matthew 24:29-30)

Not mentioned in Matthew 24:
(4. literal MK=millennial kingdom)
(5. new heaven & new earth)

The time line according to Revelation:

0. church age continues - Rev 2-3 <== you are here!
1. rapture/resurrection event - Rev 4:1 (type)
2. Tribulation time - Rev 4:2-19:10
3. Second Advent of Jesus event - Rev 19:11-21
4. literal MK=millennial kingdom - Rev 20:1-6
5. new heaven & new earth - Rev 20:7-22:5

The time line according to 2 Thessalonians 2:

0. church age continues <== you are here!
(implied, until the falling away)

1. rapture/resurrection
v.1 - gathering together unto him
v.3 - falling away

2. Tribulation time
(time of the man of sin)

3. Second Advent of Jesus event
v.1 - coming of our Lord Jesus Christ
v.8

Not mentioned:
(4. literal MK=millennial kingdom)
(5. new heaven & new earth)

BTW, I believed in the pre-tribulation rapture/resurrection
before i saw these three scriptures as pretrib.
So even if you can prove all three of these scriptures
in error, I'll still hope in the pre-tribulation rapture
as will 80% of Baptists and 60% of kindred Christians.

 

[Rex77]

Before anyone berates Irenaeus in the previous post when he writes about the rapture (caught up) , the argument is not wether he is right or wrong,
the point is that it was taught by the early church fathers long long long
before Darby or anyone else in the 1800 "s .

 

[mes228]

Rapture

I wrote that I believe scripture and that we "will be caught up" and also in a "moment and a twinkling of an eye". So did Irenaeus. What I wrote was when you get beyond this it's pretty much opinion. It may be O.K. to preach opinion and speculation, but those preached to, ought to be made very aware that it's a long way from "God" says. The typical church member in some Baptist churches has ingrained in his brain a mixture of doctrine, opinion, speculation and does not separate them. Also many are are taught in such a manner (ie inspirational, authoratative, motivational) they they condemn others and aspire to teach half truths. I don't think thats a good position to be in. Thankfully the SBC recognizes this. I agree 100% with the position of the SBC statement of faith in this matter of end times. It's carefully, thoughtfully written, scripturally based, and helps moderate some of the outlandish rapture "opinions" taught. A Baptist Preacher teaching opinion is no different than a Scientologist, Moslem, etc.etc. Also, I think you will find the urban legend is the "rapture" (the full scale,colorful model) not the charismatic originator ie teenager having the visions/dreams. I would appreciate you posting some legitimate scholar (not televangelist as the rapture is just too good of sermon fodder to pass up) outside Baptist circles that embraces the Lahaye type rapture. I'm open to repenting, are you?? Best regards and have a great day.

 

[IFB Mole]

Just from the few posts here, it doesn't seem that there is a clear consensus of the end times even amongst us narrow minded IFB types (LOL!!)

I'm not "against" The Rapture per se. What has troubled me is what seems to be tought as truth today - the Hal Lndsay, Tim LaHaye type of end times eschatology - is so universally accepted. I agree when Christ comes again we will all be caught up in the air, but all that other stuff? How does the 70th Week of Daniel fit in and on it goes. It really does seem to be a stretch of Scripture, speculation a mixing of literal and alllagory and on it goes.

I know there seems to be a teaching of a catching away of all His people at His Second Coming, but the rest of "modern" end-times teaching? dunno, even after 25 years I still don't have a firm belief on end times doctrine, other than Jesus IS coming again.....are YOU ready? That about somes it up.

 

[skypair]

The typical church member in some Baptist churches has ingrained in his brain a mixture of doctrine, opinion, speculation and does not separate them. Also many are are taught in such a manner (ie inspirational, authoratative, motivational) they they condemn others and aspire to teach half truths.

I was thinking the other day about this -- it seems that Baptists have revolted so much against the allegorizing and spiritualizing of the Reformers that we ONLY accept the literal as true. And yet the 'hidden wisdom" of God FOR US (1Cor 2:7) is in mysteries and parables which are not literal to say the least! The parable of the 10 virgins is an excellent example of a parable that is 1) misinterpretted daily and 2) speaks of the rapture.

The SBC pastor accross the street makes this point, too -- that the SBC is moving more and more away from pretrib rapture and I think another issue (besides this "literalist" emphasis) is the "seeker friendly" movement. Unbelievers especially are turned off by this "exclusivist" idea that only some "Christians" will evacuate.

skypair

 

[mes228]

Rapture

Skypair, I do feel that there's room for personal interpretation, and understanding in reading scripture. Nothing wrong with sharing your understanding with others either. As long as it's prefaced with "opinion" or "I think" etc.etc. But some don't do this from the pulpit. There's no accountability from the pews as members are there to learn from someone that presumably "knows"what he's talking about. There's no control in Baptist circles to insure that Independent Churches are taught from a scriptural, Christian basis. As a result many Baptist have belief systems that are shot through with holes, positions that are indefensible based on scripture. Most of these things are presented with a "proof texting" type teaching. Which enables anyone to prove
or teach anything. The result of this is some become Pharisaical and judgemental, absolutely sure they are "right". When in actuality what they hold as "doctrine" is only opinion and poorly founded in scripture, sometime unchristian, and in some cases actually heretical. The SBC is the only vehicle, in my knowledge, that can hope to have Ministers teach based on sound christian use of scriptures. I know that I personally have set through sermons that absolutely were heretical to Christian beliefs. The Minister was sincere, teaching as he had been taught, but absolutely wrong. Sad thing is, the congregation goes away believing what was taught. I guess I need to add - this is my opinion. But it's based on a lifetime of study (I'm 56) and repenting of what I have taught others. I have no excuse except I was sincerely teaching what I had been taught. I was wrong.

 

[Ed Edwards]

Mes228: //There's no control in Baptist circles to insure
that Independent Churches are taught from a scriptural,
Christian basis. As a result many Baptist have belief
systems that are shot through with holes, positions
that are indefensible based on scripture.//

Yes, you are right.
And it is a Baptist distinctive that it be that way
(the 'no control' part, not the 'holes' part.

And any Independent Baptist (a redundancy BTW) Church
that gets more than 1,000 members probably is in
league with the Devil. It sure happened to the guy* from
whom I got the 5 fundamentals below. It is as
though one of the New Age Fundamentals is
Eschew Success

* I forget his name - Senior Pastor of Thomas
Road Baptist Church, Lynchburg, Va.

It is a fundamental failure to go beyond the Basics
of the faith:

The fundamentals of traditional fundamentalism:

1. the inspiration and infallibility of scripture
2. the deity of Christ (including His virgin birth)
3. the substitutionary atonement of Christ's death
4. the literal resurrrection of Christ from the dead
5. the literal return of Christ in the Second Advent


One's eschatology isn't listed here in the fundamentals.

 

[mes228]

Reply

ED Edwards, working from memory again (just returned from Easter family get together). Those fundamentals you were given are the result of a "Paper" written by the Yale Theology Dept. Commissioned by a very wealthy businessman way, way back. The subject he wanted researched was "Just what is the minimum requirements for salvation". He paid a handsome sum to Yale. The question was researched, the paper produced, and returned to the man. He them made thousands of copies and distributed them throughout the country to Ministers free of charge. These were the "fundamentals" of Christian salvation. Thus those that accepted them ie agreed with them were labeled as "Fundamentalist". Many "Fundamentalist" don't know this origin and definition and apply their own definition of what a fundamentalist is. What you posted appears to be the true technical definition of what a fundamentalist is. Other denominations such as Catholic etc. use this definition when speaking of Fundamentalist. Take the details of this with a grain of salt. The gist of it is accurate, but details may be shaky as I'm writing this off the cuff and am working from memory (which isn't as sharp as it once was).

 

[mes228]

Fundamentalism

Ed, correction: It wasn't Yale , it was Princeton. date was approx. 100 years ago.
I told you I could not trust my memory. Have a blessed day.

 

[Ed Edwards]

Actually I'm an observer of the history of the word:
'fundamentalist'. In the 1920s the 'Fundamentalist Papers'
as noted by Bro. Mes228 were distributed. Then
"Fundementalist" meant a member of a movement
within American Prosestantism featuring the
literal belief of the basics (fundamentals) of Protestantism.

In the 1980s I started seeing phrases like "fundamentalist
Muslim terrorist". Wait a minute? How can a Muslim terrorist
be part of a 'movement within American Prosestant'?
The definition of "Fundamentalist" came to mean
an extreme member of any religion, which extreamity expressed
itself in the basics of that faith.

In the 1990s the politically liberal Drive-By Press (DBP)
was using "Fundamentalist" to mean a 'bigot' of
whatever stripe.

I want my word back but the DBP stole it from me.

Such term changes are used in the typical
bait & switch denigration schemes of the DBP.

 

[Allan]

The SBC pastor accross the street makes this point, too -- that the SBC is moving more and more away from pretrib rapture and I think another issue (besides this "literalist" emphasis) is the "seeker friendly" movement. Unbelievers especially are turned off by this "exclusivist" idea that only some "Christians" will evacuate.

skypair

Uh, excuse me please. I am an SBC Pastor, and frequent the state and national confrences. And No, the SBC is not moving further and further away from pre-trib rapture. Those who are opposed to it are simply speaking louder and more often. But is not swaying in much measure away from that position.

About the seeker friendly movement: Don't base what is done by many mainline mega churches as what the whole of the SBC is doing. There is quite a bit in the SBC'ers of "don't bring that mess our way". Though on THAT issue I will agree it is gaining some popularity, unfortunately.

However just because the larger and more prominent churches and their leaders are pushing it on every media venue, does not necessitate the SBC is more one the whole or in mass that direction.